Played for a big school and know many others who have done the same. Screening exams are primarily neuro and not cardio. HCM is so rare its not worth screening at a high school age. At D1 college level with all that cash tho? I'm not sure how probabilities play out.

Informing participants is the crux of this issue to me. Data is available to be distributed regarding potential links between subconcussive trauma and long-term neural changes. If this were actually elucidated (and not actively covered up by the NFL, from which most of the data is driven), we'd hopefully avoid future Borland-like cases where someone has dedicated his life to a sport, only to realize that after X amount of years, the risk was ultimately not worth it.

Informing first. Participating while understanding the risk of playing compared to not playing.

Everyone should listen to mgostrength- he's nailed everything thus far. Nothing in this article is revolutionary but it does illustrate the contrast in the newer training regimens to those of the 70s-90s and maybe even early 2000s. Everything in the article was done at UM under Barwis, but I cannot speak for the the new strength coach.

Saying a certain player did not execute his assignment is not calling out a player. It adds to the complexity of the game and it is how football should be watched. Stating player "x" sucks is idiotic, childish, and reveals to everyone else here that you likely don't know a damn thing about the sport.

was also pre-med at UM, and I have to say undergrad was no where near a joke. I think this is dependent on how busy you were outside of class (I dedicated 35+hrs/wk outside of the classroom on various activities), which meant I was busy as hell. Remove all of those hours and then the stress of med school to undergrad is not comparable, but undergrad is more about the entire experience than solely class and I wouldn't change any aspect of mine.